Mailing-List: contact dev-help@felix.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@felix.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of chris.custine@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.132.250 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references;
        b=DAF7rChqAmnSQ4JZd75XyixhDBFthmYaTpkK3R3ZofXyKrikaIjpGWXNUeP6tFLsp1EMDCACDm6N8c48eydxs+dEV6jsW6GVyzYc1Zv3w4r/UVZ+hlAPIIXowKlzohU++ux3kN5iU4WtMGLKMS3WbVdptg93BzatMBoWfHFLlhI=
Message-ID: <43b026c70705210825n27ed9ca0k6701df10c98155ee@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 09:25:50 -0600
From: "Chris Custine" <chris.custine@gmail.com>
To: dev@felix.apache.org
Subject: Re: Current Roadmap
In-Reply-To: <4651AE67.2020504@ungoverned.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_Part_108071_686056.1179761150231"
References: <7148a4f80705180111r2e5a163fw513921ef5b05ef6f@mail.gmail.com>
	 <464DB17B.9080608@ungoverned.org>
	 <7148a4f80705180747s2025960dy5377a64bd005040d@mail.gmail.com>
	 <464DBDB5.7000401@ungoverned.org> <m2hcq67n3n.fsf@apache.org>
	 <4651AE67.2020504@ungoverned.org>

------=_Part_108071_686056.1179761150231
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

Apache Directory also uses the Confluence export plugin to produce
http://directory.apache.org and I think the setup works really well for that
site.  I am sure the setup and export template could be borrowed and used in
conjunction with some minor graphics work to improve the aesthetics of the
Felix site.  I think the organization of the ADS site also implements a
couple of the suggestions listed in this thread...

Chris

On 5/21/07, Richard S. Hall <heavy@ungoverned.org> wrote:
>
> Ultimately, I agree with everything you had to say about the web site,
> except for the recommendation not to use a wiki. I don't have a love
> affair with wikis and I agree that often they do not look good, but the
> number one reason why I want to use a wiki is that I hate to do
> documentation, but wikis make it reasonably easy for me to create
> documentation or to make quick edits when I become aware of a mistake.
> Thus, I find that I maintain wiki documentation more since it has a
> lower barrier. I think this is important.
>
> For example, on another thread today someone mentioned something about
> the 'Launching and Embedding Felix' document, so I quickly jumped over
> to the wiki page and tried to add a few sentence to the page to make a
> specific issue more clear. It is nice to have this ease of
> editing/deployment.
>
> We just have to strive to have our statically generated pages not look
> ugly...they perhaps need some work in this area now... :-)
>
> -> richard
>
> J Aaron Farr wrote:
> > "Richard S. Hall" <heavy@ungoverned.org> writes:
> >
> >
> >> Matthias Luebken wrote:
> >>
> >>> I suggest that you update the website felix.apache.org so that the
> >>> ongoing improvements are reflected on the website. If you don't look
> >>> into the Jira Issue Tracker, you don't have the impression that there
> >>> is much progress at Felix.
> >>>
> >> Agreed.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > I've mentioned more than once that I'd like to help on this front.
> > The website is real weakness for Felix, IMHO.  Here are my thoughts on
> > a good website:
> >
> >  - Very organized, quickly addresses the audience and helps them find
> >    the rights spot (ie- who are you?  a developer of felix?  a user of
> >    a plugin?  a user of some other software that happens to use felix?
> >    interested in OSGI?...)
> >
> >  - VERSIONED documentation.  That is, the documents for Felix 0.8, 0.9
> >    and 1.0 are all available and not erased.  This includes javadocs.
> >
> >  - Available with the downloads and if possible, in a printer friendly
> >    format.
> >
> >  - Include more "how to use the software" documents than "how it works
> >    internally" documents.  This means at least one decent tutorial.
> >    Screencasts are even better.
> >
> > All of this is difficult, though possible, with a wiki.  I think
> > wiki's are great for community created documentation but they must be
> > well maintained, including pruning and re-organization.  A website
> > should have a flow to it, and wiki's often don't.
> >
> > My personal preference is to author the documentation in some XML
> > format and reserve the wiki for FAQ entries, quick whiteboarding of
> > ideas, and soliciting community documentation.  Good articles from the
> > wiki can then be pulled into the main, static site.
> >
> >
> > That's my thoughts.  I'd like to contribute to Felix and the best way
> > I could do that right now is with the website, but I'd like some
> > feedback from the community before I either start hacking through the
> > wiki or writing up huge amounts of docbook or xdoc.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> >
>

------=_Part_108071_686056.1179761150231--